New Jersey’s new paid parental and family leave mandate went into effect July 1. NJBIZ.com reports on the impact in “‘In a world of hurt’“:

Rich Balka, owner of Trenton-based Home Rubber Co., said he appreciates the concept behind the law. “Anything we can do to benefit our employees is a good thing,” he said.

But Balka said his company doesn’t have enough employees to sustain the loss of anyone for the time allowed by the law.

“We have really no redundancies in our employees at this point,” said Balka, who bought the industrial rubber products maker in 1996. It is one of the few manufacturers left in Trenton.

Since Home Rubber eliminated the jobs of general office manager and purchasing assistant, the remaining office staff is picking up the slack. “If I lose an employee, I’d be in a world of hurt.”

Melanie Willoughby, senior vice president with the New Jersey Business & Industry Association, said she has spoken with many business owners at seminars who remain unsure how the law will intersect with the federal leave law and other requirements. “There is tremendous confusion still among employers,” she said.

This story appeared before last Tuesday’s elections in New Jersey, where voters defeated incumbent Gov. Jon Corzine, who signed the law.

And to employers: Think you’re confused now? From WSJ, “House Bill Introduced to Require Paid Sick Leave for H1N1 Cases.”

Proponents of the Healthy Families Act are unfortunately taking advantage of the Administration’s guidance for employers on dealing with the potential H1N1 pandemic by advancing a restrictive mandate on employers that will reduce flexibility of leave options for employees.

“Workforce Magazine” reports that that advocates of the bill are interpreting recommendations by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to “establish policies for employee compensation and sick-leave absences unique to a pandemic” in a way to further promote federally mandated paid leave.

What isn’t noted is that most employers are already providing some form of sick leave for their employees; 83 percent of workers in private industry have access to illness leave.

The NAM encourages manufacturers to review the Administration’s information and develop contingency plans, as appropriate, in an effort to limit the potential negative impact on our workers, their families and our communities. However, mandating a costly one-size-fits-all approach to paid leave is far from the right approach. This legislation threatens an employer’s ability to provide the benefits that best fit the needs of their workforce. Additionally this bill would place limits on employers that provide more benefits than the minimum requirements proposed in the bill.

The advocates who are calling for passage of the Healthy Family Act in response to the H1N1 are also purposely overlooking the regulatory realities that would disconnect any new law from this year’s illness. It took 17 months to implement the final regulations for the Family and Medical Leave Act (enacted February 5, 1993; final regulations January 6, 1995). The Healthy Families Act is an equally complicated piece of legislation and there’s just no possibility of implementing it before the winter flu season. So what we’re seeing is alarmism for political purposes.

From the AFL-CIO Now blog, “House Panel OKs Paid Family Leave for Federal Workers“:

Federal workers could receive four weeks of paid family leave to care for a newborn or adopted child under a bill approved by a U.S. House subcommittee yesterday. If enacted, the bill also would allow federal workers to use up to eight weeks of accrued paid sick time or annual leave immediately following the first four weeks of parental leave.

Says AFGE President John Gage:

The time has come for the federal government to set the standard for U.S. employers on paid parental leave. The benefits to children and families of four weeks of paid parental leave are enormous and long lasting. This sets an example for private sector employers.

How does a government mandate set an example? A mandate sets a mandate.

What Gage is really saying, “This action by the House committee to require paid family and medical leave for federal workers is an example of what Congress is going to do to the private sector next.” Or so we interpret it.

The bill is H.R. 626, the Federal Employees Paid Parental Leave Act of 2009. It come out of the House Oversight and Government Reform’s Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, Post Office, and the District of Columbia by a voice vote.

Peter Kirsanow, a Cleveland attorney and former member of the National Labor Relations Board, is a keen observer of both the legal and political aspects of the Employee Free Choice Act, so we take his latest commentary at National Review’s The Corner seriously. It’s speculation, to be sure, but worth considering.

Kirsanow suspects the references in Senator Specter’s announcement about “equal access” could be the signs of what labor would call a “compromise” in the making.

From “The EFCA-Lite Trap“:

The timing of Senator Specter’s remarks is interesting. When EFCA was reintroduced in both Houses two weeks ago, Senator Harkin repeatedly invoked “equal access,” as if to signal a possible compromise based on that concept. Almost contemporaneously, Representative Sestak (D, Pa.) introduced an alternative bill that featured equal access. Last weekend, compromise proposals were floated that incorporated some of the elements Sen. Specter would be willing to consider, including equal access. And SEIU president Andy Stern (possibly the most influential EFCA supporter) is quoted in the current issue of Business Week as understanding that EFCA might need to be changed to secure passage.

It’s doubtful this flurry of activity is mere coincidence. The EFCA campaign is about to proceed to another level. Employers should be prepared to address the implications of quickie elections, equal access, and limited-interest arbitration — the combination of which would amount to “EFCA Lite.”

The elimination of secret-ballot elections was the big drag on EFCA’s prospects for passage. Now that card check may be off the table, EFCA opponents have lost their most effective talking point. Consequently, wavering senators may now be more inclined to vote for the remaining provisions of EFCA, plus quickie-election/equal-access provisions that make union organization almost as easy as card check.

Senator Specter’s announcement merely concludes Round Two.

Kirsanow is reading too much into the flurry, we think. Rep. Sestak (D-PA) introduced his bill (H.R. 1355) a week before card check, had no cosponsors, heard from the unions and cosponsored EFCA (H.R. 1409). Not really a factor.

Business groups like the NAM and our allies at the Coalition for a Democratic Workplace are NOT declaring victory and surrendering the playing field to organized labor on the bill. The unions, meanwhile, will set their sites on Senate elections 2010 in an attempt to get to 62 or 63 Senators and then ram the bill through.

Yes, efforts will likely continue to pass other bargaining-related legislation this Congress. Still, it’s our sense that Sen. Specter’s decision now frees up organized labor and their congressional allies to pursue other parts of labor’s agenda — things like paid family and medical leave, comparable worth and even new ergonomics standards. Even while the Employee Free Choice Act was being fought over prior to its introduction, organized labor was winning many legislative fights — such as inclusion of Davis-Bacon wage provisions in the stimulus bill. Card check remains a fight, but different battlefields are coming into view.

Human Events gives us a list, “Top 10 Things On Big Labor’s Agenda ”

1. Employee Free Choice Act
In addition to the notorious “card-check” provision that strips union members of their right to a secret ballot, this bill also provides for increased penalties for employers who commit allegedly unfair labor practices. These increased penalties include treble damages and civil penalties of up to $20,000.

2. Repeal of Section 14(b) of Taft-Hartley
Repeal of this section 14 of the Taft-Hartley Act would take from states the right to enact right-to-work laws.

3. Family Medical Leave Act expansion
Bills sponsored by Sen. Chris Dodd (D.-Conn.) in the last Congress proposed creation of an insurance system to provide for paid family medical leave and an expansion of the employers covered by the act.

4. Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act
This proposal is a response to the Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. decision, in which the Supreme Court said that the 180-day statute of limitations for equal pay lawsuits begins on the date the pay was agreed to. The Lilly Ledbetter Act would re-start the statute of limitations each time that a paycheck was received.

5. Minimum Wage Hike
Barack Obama’s website promises to “raise the minimum wage to $9.50 an hour by 2011.”

6. Patriot Employer Act
This bill imposes tax increases on companies that have major operations outside the U.S. and tax hikes on those don’t agree to “labor neutrality,” card check, etc.

7. Government unions
Barack Obama promised during the campaign that he would fight for collective bargaining rights for Transportation Security Administration workers. Big Labor will also seek the forced unionization of police, firefighters, and EMTs by federal fiat — overturning the laws of more than two dozen states.

8. Union Financial Disclosure
Drastically revise the Office of Labor-Management Standards’ Form LM-2 that has embarrassed and caused legal problems for union bosses by forcing them to reveal their salaries and spending.

9. National Labor Relations Board
Ram through a pro-union-appointee to the NLRB and add more labor advocates to the board. Right now, of the five seats, three are vacant.

10. Overturn Bush orders
Immediate revocation of Bush executive order on Beck rights notices and Bush executive order prohibitions on use of discriminatory union-only Project Labor Agreements in federal contracting.

And don’t forget: Expand Davis-Bacon wage mandates.

(Hat tip: Jim Gray)

Last year the Department of Labor started developing a rule governing how the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) should be interpreted and implemented. Finally today, the Department announced their final regulation which strengthens this important law that has benefitted millions of employees. These new rules not only clear up much of the confusion that surrounded the law but defines how the families of military personnel can use the FMLA for the first time.

The Washington Post publishes today as its lead, page one story, “A Last Push to Deregulate” with a subhed, “White House to Ease Many Rules.”

The White House is working to enact a wide array of federal regulations, many of which would weaken government rules aimed at protecting consumers and the environment, before President Bush leaves office in January.

The new rules would be among the most controversial deregulatory steps of the Bush era and could be difficult for his successor to undo. Some would ease or lift constraints on private industry, including power plants, mines and farms.

Given the placement and the headline’s tone, we anticipated another bit of agenda journalism, especially since the first source cited is one of the regulatory zealots at the group, OMB Watch.

OMB Watch leads its website with activist huffing and puffing about “midnight regulations,” the nefarious practice of enacting last-minute regulations. ABC News has already bought OMB Watch’s spiel doing a segment yesterday, “The Bush Administration’s Midnight Regulations,” referring to the lead OMB spokesman and activist on the issue as an “expert.” Right. Disinterested expert.

But, kudos, the Post story is pretty balanced. It gives the Administration a place to state its case up high in the story, noting the deadlines that OMB set to allow a full examination of regulations before they’re promulgated. The reporter, R. Jeffrey Smith, describes the Clinton Administration’s undisciplined, partisan rush of last-minute regs, as well, providing some grounds for comparison: “While it remains unclear how much the administration will be able to accomplish in the coming weeks, the last-minute rush appears to involve fewer regulations than Bush’s predecessor, Bill Clinton, approved at the end of his tenure.” Including some enacted even AFTER the Clinton Administration left office.

So good job, Washington Post. Hope all the other media outlets that get lobbied into a story by OMB Watch strive for as much accuracy, balance and context. We did laugh when we encountered this paragraph, though:

As many as 90 new regulations are in the works, and at least nine of them are considered “economically significant” because they impose costs or promote societal benefits that exceed $100 million annually. They include new rules governing employees who take family- and medical-related leaves, new standards for preventing or containing oil spills, and a simplified process for settling real estate transactions.

Surely no one is going to be audacious enough to claim proposed Family and Medical Leave Act regulations are last-minute, perfidious “midnight regulations.” The Department of Labor’s Employment Standards Administration issued a request for information on the FMLA on December 1, 2006.

Working on a regulation for nearly two years really doesn’t qualify as a midnight regulation.

Peter List at EmployerReport.com has put together a good list of legislation that could become law if the stars align on the left side of the political hemisphere after the November election. One could quibble, but all in all, it’s representative of organized labor’s electoral and then legislative priorities:

• Employee Free Choice Act (no-vote unionism and binding arbitration 120 days after unionization)
• Elimination of Right-to-Work states (making all 50 states forced unionization states)
• Ledbetter Fair Pay Act (eliminates statutes of limitations on pay discrimination claims)
• Healthy Families Act (mandates seven paid sick days for employers with more than 15 workers)
• Expanding FMLA to include parenting responsibilities (i.e., parent-teacher conferences) and literacy training
• Arbitration Fairness Act (eliminates PRE-dispute arbitration agreements)
• Public Employee-Employer Cooperation Act (unionizes EMS, Fire & Police at the local and state levels)
• WARN Act expansion to smaller companies
• ADA Restoration Act (expands the definition of disability)
• Protecting America’s Workers Act (increases penalties–to include prison time–for employers guilty of “willfully” OSHA)
• Legalizing undocumented workers…and, of course,
• Nationalization of America’s Health Care System 

(Hat tip: Jim Gray)